Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-47424-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 19:19:16 -0500
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, msnitzer@redhat.com, ignat@cloudflare.com,
	damien.lemoal@wdc.com, bob.liu@oracle.com, houtao1@huawei.com,
	peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	allen.lkml@gmail.com, kernel-team@meta.com,
	Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] dm-verity: Convert from tasklet to BH workqueue
Message-ID: <ZbrjhJFMttj8lh3X@redhat.com>
References: <20240130091300.2968534-1-tj@kernel.org>
 <20240130091300.2968534-9-tj@kernel.org>
 <c2539f87-b4fe-ac7d-64d9-cbf8db929c7@redhat.com>
 <Zbq8cE3Y2ZL6dl8r@slm.duckdns.org>
 <CAHk-=wjMz_1mb+WJsPhfp5VBNrM=o8f-x2=6UW2eK5n4DHff9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZbrgCPEolPJNfg1x@slm.duckdns.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZbrgCPEolPJNfg1x@slm.duckdns.org>

On Wed, Jan 31 2024 at  7:04P -0500,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hello, Linus.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 03:19:01PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 13:32, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know, so just did the dumb thing. If the caller always guarantees
> > > that the work items are never queued at the same time, reusing is fine.
> > 
> > So the reason I thought it would be a good cleanup to introduce that
> > "atomic" workqueue thing (now "bh") was that this case literally has a
> > switch between "use tasklets' or "use workqueues".
> > 
> > So it's not even about "reusing" the workqueue, it's literally a
> > matter of making it always just use workqueues, and the switch then
> > becomes just *which* workqueue to use - system or bh.
> 
> Yeah, that's how the dm-crypt got converted. The patch just before this one.
> This one probably can be converted the same way. I don't see the work item
> being re-initialized. It probably is better to initialize the work item
> together with the enclosing struct and then just queue it when needed.

Sounds good.
 
> Mikulas, I couldn't decide what to do with the "try_verify_in_tasklet"
> option and just decided to do the minimal thing hoping that someone more
> familiar with the code can take over the actual conversion. How much of user
> interface commitment is that? Should it be renamed or would it be better to
> leave it be?

cryptsetup did add support for it, so I think it worthwhile to
preserve the option; but it'd be fine to have it just be a backward
compatible alias for a more appropriately named option?

Mike